Category Archives: Welfare

Bill Lockwood: Where Did America Go Wrong? 4 (2)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Our borders are completely out of control; our welfare state has become overburdened with every form of “benevolence” that any politician might image; and the bureaucratic Biden Administration now looks more like a communistic regime ordering draconian COVID shots for private businesses than a guardianship of liberty.

Make no mistake. This is the hour of trial for America. It is the Constitution – the fundamental law of our nation — that is being trashed.

The official National Archives Website has added a trigger “WARNING” to all readers of THE US CONSTITUTION, THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS. The cautionary label warns about the “harmful language” in these documents.

The “trigger warning” by our own government reads: As part of the National Archives’ “institutional commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility,” we are now flagging “potentially harmful content,” which we define as reflecting “racist, sexist, ableist, misogynistic/misogynoir, and xenophobic opinions and attitudes” as well as being “discriminatory towards or exclude diverse views on sexuality, gender, religion, and more.”

I don’t even know what some of these terms mean, but our own government portrays our founding as hateful and the laws that flow from it as harmful. Little wonder therefore, that schools and universities portray our Founding Fathers as purveyors of hate who installed “protectionist policies” to guard their wealth. The National Archives’ Task Force insisted earlier this summer that the historic portrayal of the founding fathers has previously been “too positive.”

With sad reflection we ask,

Where Did America Go Wrong?

One of the chief taproots of our derangement is the so-called “Welfare System.” This is where the strong arm of government steals from one segment of society to redistribute to others—whether in monies or social benefits.

James Madison, the father of the Constitution, in 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief for French refugees who fled from insurrection in Dan Domingo (now Haiti) to Baltimore and Philadelphia. Madison stated, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

Pretty telling isn’t it? Especially as we now have tens of thousands of Haitians massing at our border in Del Rio, TX specifically for the welfare benefits of housing, medical care, food, education and whatever other form the “government” checks may take. And not only Haitians—but millions upon millions of non-citizens that the “powers that be” have continued to shower with tax-payer funded benefits.

Other presidents who followed Madison had similar respect for the Constitution. In 1854 President Franklin Pierce vetoed a bill to help the mentally ill, observing, “I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity.” He added that to approve the proposed measure “would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.”

Numerous other illustrations could be given demonstrating the unconstitutionality of utilizing taxpayer money to give to those deemed to be in need.

We now live in a socialistic state that completely disdains the Constitution. It is true that not all of the details of socialism have been ironed out as of yet; for example, we do not have Universal Health Care run by the government—but we are close. But the most dangerous element that the Welfare State introduces is that it corrodes our ability to reason.

The problem is in our thinking. Or, lack thereof. The 19th century French economist Frederic Bastiat exposed the mistake in our thought processes, which the founding generation was able to see.

Socialism … confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all….It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

The corruptions in our system seem overwhelming, whether in business, government, military, education, or whatever. Much of the poison that causes this can be primarily traced to the unconstitutional welfare system. It blinds us to the simple reality that “people assisting people” is not the same as “government” forcibly taking from some to redistribute to others.

 

Bill Lockwood: Welfare and “Original Sin”? 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Ellie Bufkin of the Washington Examiner, wrote the following. “Democratic Texas Rep. Al Green claimed that President Trump’s impeachment was necessary to deal with the ‘original’ sin of slavery.

“During a Saturday appearance on MSNBC, the congressman cited an interest in acting on behalf of people of color. ‘I do believe, ma’am, that we have to deal with the original sin,’ Green said to host Alex Witt. ‘We have to deal with slavery. Slavery was the thing that put all of what President Trump has done lately into motion. It’s [the] insidious scion of racism. The president has played on racism, and he’s used that as a weapon to galvanize a base of support to mobilize people.’”

Let’s step back a moment.

The biblical scholar R.C. Foster observed over a hundred years ago that the rejection of Jesus by his home town of Nazareth (Luke 4) was in part due to the “most common and worst of crimes”—ingratitude. “It is often true that the more that is done for unworthy people, the less they appreciate it and the more they presume upon the generosity of others and grow in the false grandeur of their own conceit.” That this is self-evidently true is seen in the sad reality now in America. Ingratitude.

Prior to the creation of our welfare state in America, charity was practiced by individuals, churches and private organizations. This was the formula of the Founding Fathers. So successful was it that there is no record of people dying on the streets because of lack of food, shelter or medical assistance. Americans were the most generous people on the earth. So thought Alexis de Tocqueville when visiting our country from France in 1831 and 1832.

Enter the welfare state of the federal government. It has helped create the opposite of its stated goal of alleviating the poor. Not only has poverty continued to rise in America, but the sense of “entitlement” followed by the “worst of crimes”—ingratitude—has become commonplace. This has now morphed into a boiling hatred for whites in many minority communities that one can hear, see, and feel.

See the statistics on recipients of the state-sponsored welfare state. According to the U.S. Census Bureau “approximately 21.3 percent of people in the United States participated in major means-tested government assistance programs each month in 2012.” Participation rates for the black population is at 41.6 percent; followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent; then Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent; lastly, by non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent. Stating the obvious, the Bureau concluded “blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.”

Added to overt financial assistance from the public trough, minority communities have also been the favored recipients of government policies such as affirmative action which has been touted as necessary to fight the enduring effects of white racism. Our entire culture is saturated with affirmative action practices, from educational institutions, medical schools, law schools, even the military itself. But instead of alleviating racial animosity, the only enduring lesson that is being ingrained is hatred for a white America that supposedly is racist.

Al Green

Back to Al Green. Hatred simply seethes in America. The comment by Democratic Texas lawmaker Al Green, who claims that America needs to deal with racism of the past by impeaching President Trump, is a perfect example. To Green, everything that occurs is colored in racial tones. White America can elect a Barack Obama, can pay millions of dollars to black sports and entertainment hero’s; can acquiesce to affirmative action programs that favor people of color in all segments of society—yet nothing is enough. Atonement is never found. This is the way hate works. Hate is a leviathan with an insatiable appetite. Always hungry for more, but never satisfied. Al Green is afflicted with it, and it has become so pervasive that Green feels comfortable airing his hatred on national television.

The “original sin” of which Al Green speaks is ingratitude. His own. His ingratitude for being a legislative leader in the greatest country that has ever existed. He has allowed the ingratitude in his soul to hard-boil into hatred. Al Green hasn’t ever been a slave; nor his father, and I dare say even his grandfather. He knows no slave holders in America, nor the sons of slave holders. The only people that are slaves are the middle-class taxpayers who support his gigantic welfare state. But this is not enough.

Just as with the election of Barack Obama, many whites supposed that racial animosity would subside, but they were mistaken. It metastasized. Hatred knows no bounds. Even if Donald Trump is successfully impeached and removed from office, which would be a travesty in American justice, Al Green’s hatred will only increase.

War on the Poor 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

War on the Poor

by Bill Lockwood

When Benjamin Franklin visited London in 1766, he observed that the “British Welfare Act” actually had the opposite effect. Instead of assisting the poverty-stricken, government welfare in point of fact had exacerbated it. “There is no country in the world in which the poor are more idle, dissolute, drunken, and insolent,” he noted of the British. “The day you passed that act you took away from before their eyes the greatest of all inducements to industry, frugality and sobriety, by giving them dependence on somewhat else than a careful accumulation during youth and health for support in age and sickness…Repeal that law and you will soon see a change in their manners. St. Monday and St. Tuesday will cease to be holidays.”

Unfortunately for America, from the Progressive Era forward, we have purposefully ignored sound biblical principles regarding work and money, not to mention the Constitution. Eighteenth-century Europe which Franklin witnessed, therefore, has been more than duplicated. Our streets are now filled with the young and the restless who are constantly threatening to erupt—many of whom, it would be safe to say—are beneficiaries of government hand-outs. We are paying for our own demise.

How has our government waged a war, not on poverty, but on the poor themselves? Which sound principles of human nature, found in the Bible, have we set aside? What can be done to rectify the situation?

Poverty and Government

The general biblical principle is as follows. “Go to the ant, you sluggard; consider its ways and be wise! It has no commander, no overseer or ruler, yet it stores its provisions in summer and gathers its food at harvest. How long will you lie there, you sluggard? When will you get up from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest—and poverty will come on you like a thief and scarcity like an armed man” (Proverbs 6:6-11).
Poverty is a direct result from laziness. This is the general rule. “The hand of the diligent will rule, while the slothful will be put to forced labor” (12:24). Behind the political divisions in our once-great nation there lies an ethical law. The slothful descend into pauperism or servitude. Is this to say that every situation of poverty is self-inflicted? No. There are many cases for which the poor need to have provisions from compassionate people. But the government is the last machine that effectively supplies this. As Clarence Carson long ago wrote, government force intervening in these situations most frequently distorts reality and obscures which actions would be most economical (War on the Poor).

Consider the following principles.
• Poverty Itself is Not Evil. God warns that most frequently it is affluence which offers more dangerous temptations and pitfalls than poverty. One can read about this in 1 Timothy 6:19-21. Many have deliberately chosen poverty. Witness number of religious persons throughout history who, for one reason or another, have taken vows of poverty.
• Poverty is a Signal. Giving an aspirin to one who has a viral disease may make that person feel better, but it does not alleviate the real cause of the sickness. So also, throwing money into poor neighborhoods or families alleviates symptoms, but does not cure the potential problem. It may be that there is too much “folding of the hands.” Poverty may indicate that someone is wasting resources instead of saving them. It may indicate that someone is producing something for which there is little need, such as a young musician who spends an inordinate amount of time on his guitar instead of making ends meet. Poverty in these cases is a good thing because it teaches one to re-allocate his/her resources and efforts.
• Government Distorts the Signals. Instead of allowing individuals who foolishly spend their time and effort pursuing non-productive areas to suffer the natural consequences of these decisions, the government skews the signals.  The prime motivating factor that causes one to make better decisions is lacking what one needs. But the confiscation and re-distribution model disallows people to feel what they need—motivation. If passing grades are “given” to all students—as is now being done in most quarters—the motivating factor (poor grades) to study harder is removed. Thus, we have an “entitlement” generation being developed in schools and entering into society at large. Incentive to production, whether grades or wealth, is being nullified today in America. Tattoo parlors and The Lottery would probably go out of business if we allowed people to feel the consequences of their own foolish decisions.
• Poverty Cannot Entirely Be Abolished. Jesus himself said, “the poor you have with you always” (Matt. 26:11). The Council of Economic Advisors to President Lyndon Johnson (1964) disagreed with Jesus. “There will always be some Americans who are better off than others. But it need not follow that ‘the poor are always with us.’ In the US today we can see on the horizon a society of abundance, free of much of the misery and degradation that have been the age-old fate of man” (Carson, 30). President Obama thinks our Lord got it wrong and that the president’s ipse dixit can fix it by “closing the wage gap” and forcing businesses to pay for the non-skilled workers, which they may or may not need. Streets are filling with Bernie Sanders supporters who ignorantly suppose that not only is health care a “right” but that college education should be free.

Some may read the above lines and suppose that I am NOT for aiding the poor. Nothing can be further from the truth. However, from a constitutional and biblical standpoint this is to be handled at a personal and church congregational level. And, even then, the New Testament demands that churches distinguish between those who really are in need from those who might take advantage of the system. Read 1 Timothy 5 for some of these instructions.

In the end, Thomas Chalmers, the Scottish minister and political economist of the 19th century may have summed up America rather well. Examining the English experience of his day he commented, “State aid had been a mighty solvent to sunder the ties of kinship, to quench the affections of the family, to suppress in the poor themselves the instinct to self-reliance and self-respect—to convert them to paupers.” It appears that we cannot learn from history. Only by returning to sound biblical principles can America hope to survive.

Back to Homepage